Wayne Davis v. Community Development Personne

Filing 920091222

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-1812

WAYNE L. DAVIS, Plaintiff ­ Appellant, v. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PERSONNEL; RACHEL O'DWYER FLYNN; ART DAHLBERG; FARRAL HENDERSON; BONNIE FRIEDMAN; ROY W. EIDEM; ALAN W. MCMAHAM; DYETT ELLIS; MICHELLE COWARD; KEISHA STEPHENSON; DWIGHT C. JONES, Mayor, City of Richmond; TIMOTHY KAINE, Governor; WILLIAM C. SHELTON, State Director, the Jackson Center; NORMAN B. SALES, Richmond City Attorney; GREGORY A. LUKANUSKI, Assistant Attorney, Office of the City Attorney; BILL MIMS, Attorney General, Defendants ­ Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, Senior District Judge. (3:09-cv-00133-REP)

Submitted:

November 9, 2009

Decided:

December 22, 2009

Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Wayne L. Davis, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM: Wayne L. Davis seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing his complaint without prejudice. may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, This court 28 U.S.C.

§ 1291 (2006), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2006); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v.

Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541 (1949).

The order

Davis seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. See Domino Sugar Corp.

v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1067 (4th Cir. 1993). Accordingly, jurisdiction. we dismiss the appeal for lack of

We deny Davis's motion to reconsider our previous We dispense

order denying his motion for stay pending appeal.

with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and

argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED

2